Abstract

The COVID pandemic has given rise to the necessity of social distancing regulations, which has brought the importance of workspace management on the construction site to an unprecedented level. Understanding and visualizing the interaction and tradeoff among space, time, and workforce is critical for construction managers to schedule and deliver projects on time. Therefore, the objectives of this research are to investigate how the critical path method (CPM) and Takt-time planning methods utilize space, time, and workforce differently, develop a tool to visualize the space–time–workforce interactions, and investigate the space–time–workforce tradeoff based on different managers’ preferences. This research selected a high-rise office building project and collected 889 sets of productivity data of five specialty trades. The research built a simulation model to investigate productivity and project performance under 267 scenarios of different combinations of the three resources. A dynamic tool was then developed to visualize workspace, time, and workforce interactions. Finally, a Choquet integral–based evaluation and decision tool was developed. The simulation results show that the Takt-time planning method can reduce up to 80% of workspace overlap compared with the actual production plan with less than 20% of duration extension. The contributions to the body of knowledge are (1) creating a visual framework for managers to understand the interaction and tradeoff among space, time, and workforce quickly and accurately, and (2) developing an innovative Choquet integral approach for managers to evaluate planning strategies according to project preferences. The framework and analysis method can be adapted to other construction projects to assist managers to visualize and optimize the space–time–workforce tradeoff under uncertain project drivers.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are available from the corresponding author by request.

References

Abbasian-Hosseini, S. A., M. Liu, and G. Howell. 2018. “Investigating the cost-benefit trade-off of additional planning using parade game simulation.” J. Manage. Eng. 34 (2): 04017066. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000580.
Abdelmohsen, A. Z., and K. El-Rayes. 2018. “Optimizing the planning of highway work zones to maximize safety and mobility.” J. Manage. Eng. 34 (1): 04017048. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000570.
Akinci, B., M. Fischen, R. Levitt, and R. Carlson. 2002. “Formalization and automation of time-space conflict analysis.” J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 16 (2): 124–134. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2002)16:2(124).
Altiok, T., and B. Melamed. 2007. Simulation modeling and analysis with Arena. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
Araya, F., K. M. Faust, and J. A. Kaminsky. 2021. “Agent-based model of hosting communities’ perceptions of water and wastewater infrastructure during the German refugee crisis.” J. Manage. Eng. 37 (4): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000938.
Assaad, R., and I. H. El-adaway. 2021. “Guidelines for responding to COVID-19 pandemic: Best practices, impacts, and future research directions.” J. Manage. Eng. 37 (3): 06021001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000906.
Ayub, M. 2009. “Choquet and Sugeno integrals.” Master’s thesis, Dept. of Mathematics and Science, Blekinge Institute of Technology.
Baldwin, A., and D. Bordoli. 2014. A handbook for construction planning and scheduling. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell.
Briggs, R. A. 2019. “Normative theories of rational choice: Expected utility.” In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, edited by E. N. Zalta. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ.
Choquet, G. 1954. “Theory of capacities.” Annales de l’Institut Fourier 5: 131–295. https://doi.org/10.5802/aif.53.
Demirel, T., S. C. Öner, S. Tüzün, M. Deveci, M. Öner, and N. Ç. Demirel. 2018. “Choquet integral-based hesitant fuzzy decision-making to prevent soil erosion.” Geoderma 313 (1): 276–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.10.054.
Du, J., and M. El-Gafy. 2015. “Using agent-based modeling to investigate goal incongruence issues in proposal development: Case study of an EPC project.” J. Manage. Eng. 31 (6): 05014025. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000343.
Du, J., M. El-Gafy, and D. Zhao. 2016. “Optimization of change order management process with object-oriented discrete event simulation: Case study.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 142 (4): 05015018. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001092.
Faloughi, M., M. Linnik, D. Murphy, and A. G. Frandson. 2015. “WIP design in a construction project using Takt time planning.” In Proc., 23rd Annual Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 23), edited by O. Seppänen, V. A. González, and P. Arroyo, 163–172. Fortaleza, Brazil: International Group for Lean Construction.
Feng, C., P. Wu, and K. Chia. 2010. “A hybrid fuzzy integral decision-making model for locating manufacturing centers in China: A case study.” Eur. J. Oper. Res. 200 (1): 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.12.004.
Frandson, A., K. Berghede, and I. D. Tommelein. 2013. “Takt time planning for construction of exterior cladding.” In Proc., 21st Annual Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 21), 527–536. Fortaleza, Brazil: International Group for Lean Construction.
Frandson, A., K. Berghede, and I. D. Tommelein. 2014. “Takt-time planning and the last planner.” In Vol. 1 of Proc., 22nd Annual Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 22), 571–580. Fortaleza, Brazil: International Group for Lean Construction.
Frandson, A. G., O. Seppänen, and I. D. Tommelein. 2015. “Comparison between location based management and Takt time planning.” In Proc., 23rd Annual Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 23), 3–12. Fortaleza, Brazil: International Group for Lean Construction.
Galloway, P. D. 2006. “Survey of the construction industry relative to the use of CPM scheduling for construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 132 (7): 697–711. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:7(697).
Gan, L., and J. Xu. 2015. “Control risk for multimode resource-constrained project scheduling problems under hybrid uncertainty.” J. Manage. Eng. 31 (3): 04014044. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000243.
García-Nieves, J. D., J. L. Ponz-Tienda, A. Salcedo-Bernal, and E. Pellicer. 2018. “The multimode resource-constrained project scheduling problem for repetitive activities in construction projects.” Comput.-Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 33 (8): 655–671. https://doi.org/10.1111/mice.12356.
Grabisch, M., and C. Labreuche. 2010. “A decade of application of the Choquet and Sugeno integrals in multi-criteria decision aid.” Ann. Oper. Res. 175 (1): 247–286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-009-0655-8.
Halpin, D. 1977. “CYCLONE method for modeling job site processes.” J. Constr. Div. 103 (3): 489–499. https://doi.org/10.1061/JCCEAZ.0000712.
Jia, J., G. Ma, Z. Wu, M. Wu, and S. Jiang. 2021. “Unveiling the impact of task conflict on construction project performance: Mediating role of knowledge integration.” J. Manage. Eng. 37 (6): 04021060. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000963.
Jiang, T., X. An, R. E. Minchin, and S. Li. 2016. “Application of discrete-event simulation in the quantitative evaluation of information systems in infrastructure maintenance management processes.” J. Manage. Eng. 32 (2): 05015008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000403.
Kenley, R., and O. Seppänen. 2010. Location-based management for construction: Planning, scheduling and control. London: Routledge.
Khamooshi, H., and D. F. Cioffi. 2013. “Uncertainty in task duration and cost estimates: Fusion of probabilistic forecasts and deterministic scheduling.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 139 (5): 488–497. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000616.
Kim, K., J. Walewski, and Y. K. Cho. 2016. “Multiobjective construction schedule optimization using modified niched Pareto genetic algorithm.” J. Manage. Eng. 32 (2): 04015038. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000374.
Kim, S., M. Kong, J. Choi, S. Han, H. Baek, and T. Hong. 2021. “Feasibility analysis of COVID-19 response guidelines at construction sites in South Korea using CYCLONE in terms of cost and time.” J. Manage. Eng. 37 (5): 04021048. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000957.
Kisi, K. P., N. Mani, E. M. Rojas, and E. T. Foster. 2017. “Optimal productivity in labor-intensive construction operations: Pilot study.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 143 (3): 04016107. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001257.
Koskela, L. 1992. Application of the new production philosophy to construction. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ.
Linnik, M., K. Berghede, and G. Ballard. 2013. “An experiment in Takt time planning applied to non-repetitive work.” In Proc., 21th Annual Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 21), 609–618. Fortaleza, Brazil: International Group for Lean Construction.
Maidstone, R. 2012. “Discrete event simulation, system dynamics and agent based simulation: Discussion and comparison.” Accessed September 16, 2021. https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/robert.maidstone/pdf/MresSimulation.pdf.
Martinez, J. C. 1996. “Stroboscope—State and resource based simulation of construction processes.” Dissertation, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Michigan.
Martinez, J. C. 2001. “EZStrobe—General-purpose simulation system based on activity cycle diagrams.” In Proc., 2001 Simulation Conf., 1556–1564. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society Press.
Mirzaei, A., F. Nasirzadeh, M. Parchami Jalal, and Y. Zamani. 2018. “4D-BIM dynamic time–space conflict detection and quantification system for building construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 144 (7): 04018056. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001504.
Mun, J. 2008. Advanced analytical models: Over 800 models and 300 applications from the Basel II Accord to Wall Street and beyond. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Olivieri, H., O. Seppänen, T. D. C. L. Alves, N. M. Scala, V. Schiavone, M. Liu, and A. D. Granja. 2019. “Survey comparing critical path method, last planner system, and location-based techniques.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 145 (12): 04019077. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001644.
Pasrija, V., S. Kumar, and P. R. Srivastava. 2012. “Assessment of software quality: Choquet integral approach.” In Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. Communication, 153–162. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
Raoufi, M., and A. R. Fayek. 2022. “New modes of operating for construction organizations during the COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges, actions, and future best practices.” J. Manage. Eng. 38 (2): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0001009.
Sonmez, R., and M. Gürel. 2016. “Hybrid optimization method for large-scale multimode resource-constrained project scheduling problem.” J. Manage. Eng. 32 (6): 04016020. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000468.
Su, Y., S. Isaac, and G. Lucko. 2018. “Integrated temporal-spatial model for construction plans with Boolean logic operators.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 144 (4): 04018009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001450.
Tommelein, I. D. 2017. “Collaborative Takt time planning of non-repetitive work.” In Proc., 25th Annual Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 25), 745–752. Fortaleza, Brazil: International Group for Lean Construction.
Vu, H. Q., G. Beliakov, and G. Li. 2014. “A Choquet integral toolbox and its application in customer preference analysis.” In Data mining applications with R, edited by Y. Zhao and Y. Cen, 247–272. Boston: Academic Press.
Wang, J., and H. Yuan. 2017. “System dynamics approach for investigating the risk effects on schedule delay in infrastructure projects.” J. Manage. Eng. 33 (1): 04016029. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000472.
Wang, W., Y. Fu, J. Gao, K. Shang, S. Gao, J. Xing, G. Ni, Z. Yuan, Y. Qiao, and L. Mi. 2021. “How the COVID-19 outbreak affected organizational citizenship behavior in emergency construction megaprojects : Case study from two emergency hospital projects in Wuhan, China.” J. Manage. Eng. 37 (3): 04021008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000922.
Wang, Y., Y. Le, and J. Dai. 2015. “Incorporation of alternatives and importance levels in scheduling complex construction programs.” J. Manage. Eng. 31 (6): 04014098. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000349.
Willis, C., and D. Friedman. 1998. Building the empire state building. New York: Norton.
Wold, S., K. Esbensen, and P. Geladi. 1987. “Principal component analysis.” Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2 (1): 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-7439(87)80084-9.
Yassine, T., M. Bassel, S. Bacha, F. Faek, and F. Hamzeh. 2014. “Implementing Takt-time planning in construction to improve work flow.” In Proc. 22nd Annual Conf. of the Int. Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 22), 789–798. Fortaleza, Brazil: International Group for Lean Construction.
Yildiz, A. E., I. Dikmen, and M. T. Birgonul. 2020. “Using system dynamics for strategic performance management in construction.” J. Manage. Eng. 36 (2): 04019051. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000744.
Zhao, X., L. Chen, W. Pan, and Q. Lu. 2017. “AHP-ANP–fuzzy integral integrated network for evaluating performance of innovative business models for sustainable building.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 143 (8): 4017054. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001348.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Management in Engineering
Journal of Management in Engineering
Volume 38Issue 4July 2022

History

Received: Jul 6, 2021
Accepted: Jan 5, 2022
Published online: Apr 5, 2022
Published in print: Jul 1, 2022
Discussion open until: Sep 5, 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Ph.D. Candidate, Dept. of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27695. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0482-6243. Email: [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, NY 13244; Adjunct Professor, School of Civil Engineering, Qingdao Univ. of Technology, Qingdao, Shandong 266033, China (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3070-7109. Email: [email protected]
YuXiang Zhang, Ph.D. [email protected]
Lecturer, School of Civil Engineering, Qingdao Univ. of Technology, Qingdao, Shandong 266033, China. Email: [email protected]
Zhigao Wang [email protected]
Graduate Student, School of Civil Engineering, Qingdao Univ. of Technology, Qingdao, Shandong 266033, China. Email: [email protected]
Professor and Department Chair, Dept. of Systems Engineering and Engineering Management, Univ. of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3224-9137. Email: [email protected]
Ph.D. Candidate, Dept. of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27695. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1935-2949. Email: [email protected]
Senior Engineer, China Construction Eight Engineering Div. Corp., Ltd., No. 8 Qinling Rd., Qingdao, Shandong 266001, China. Email: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

  • Improving Construction Meeting Effectiveness: Trade-Offs between Reactive and Proactive Site-Level Planning Discussions, Journal of Management in Engineering, 10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-6087, 40, 5, (2024).
  • Motivating Reliable Collaboration for Modular Construction: Shapley Value–Based Smart Contract, Journal of Management in Engineering, 10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-5428, 39, 6, (2023).
  • Using Images to Detect, Plan, Analyze, and Coordinate a Smart Contract in Construction, Journal of Management in Engineering, 10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-5121, 39, 2, (2023).
  • Space–Time–Workforce Visualization and Conditional Capacity Synthesis in Uncertainty, Journal of Management in Engineering, 10.1061/JMENEA.MEENG-4991, 39, 2, (2023).

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share